list_tasks

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists tasks with filters, which implies a read-only operation, but does not disclose pagination, ordering, scope (e.g., user vs global), rate limits, or data freshness. The existence of an output schema mitigates the lack of return value explanation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the action and lists filters. It is concise but could be more informative without becoming verbose; no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 5 optional parameters, no parameter descriptions, no annotations, and no behavioral details, the description is incomplete. The output schema covers return structure, but missing guidance on ordering, limits, or typical usage scenarios leaves the agent under-informed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only lists parameter names (status, priority, project_id, context, tag) without explaining valid values, formats, or relationships. This adds minimal value beyond the schema itself.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description specifies the verb 'List' and resource 'tasks', and enumerates optional filters (status, priority, project, context, tag). This clearly defines the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from siblings like get_task (single task) and get_next_actions (specific filtered list).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for listing tasks with optional filters, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for a single task use get_task) or alternatives. However, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.